Background D: The “Phenomenon Objective”

There exist no two identical dogs.

At some stage in the education of a two year old child his parents point with a finger at the family-dog and say “dog”.

After this has been repeated a few times, that child points with his finger at that dog and says “dog”.

With that the child proves that

• it has put the “group of cognition-marks” representing the family-dog in its memory and
• that it therefore can recognise the family-dog from then onwards.

At some next occasion his parents point with a finger at the dog of the neighbours and say ”dog”. A few days later they point with a finger at a third dog walking in the street and say “dog”.

Thereafter a miracle occurs……..the child points with his finger at a dog it has never seen before, and says “dog”.

With that the child proves that

• it has discovered the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental images of all particular dogs that exist have in common,
• that it has stored that “group of cognition-marks” in his memory and
• that it can recognise that “group of cognition-marks” from then onwards.

With that the child also proves, that it can distinguish two different “groups of cognition-marks” in its image of a particular dog

• the “group of cognition-marks of the mental image of that particular dog”, and
• the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental images of all particular dogs that exist have in common.

Note:

• There exist no two identical dogs.

  This means, that

  • the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental images of all particular dogs that exist have in common, contains less cognition-marks than the “group of cognition-marks of the mental image of the family-dog”, and
  • that the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental images of all particular dogs that exist have in common”, is an abstraction of the “group of cognition-marks of the mental image of the family-dog”.

In daily life people use the phrases

• “the dog” and
• “a dog”

but most of these people do not realise, that these phrases respectively indicate the different “groups of cognition-marks”:

• the “group of cognition-marks of the mental image of a particular dog”, and
• the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective images of all particular dogs that exist have in common.

The fact, that the same word “dog” can be used to indicate two different “groups of cognition-marks” of the same mental image of a particular dog can lead to some confusion.

To avoid such a confusion I will indicate the difference between these “groups of cognition-marks” by giving these “groups of cognition-marks” different names:

• I call the “group of cognition-marks of the mental image of a particular dog”………“the dog”, and
• I call the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental images of all particular dogs that exist have in common…………“the phenomenon dog”.

Compare

A teacher can’t help a human being to discover the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental representations of all particular objectives that exist have in common, by

• pointing with his finger at an objective and say “objective”,
• by subsequently pointing at another objective and say “objective”,
• et cetera

Simply because one can’t point at something which is invisible and an objective is invisible.

A human being can nevertheless notice that other people

• know the word “objective”, and
• use the word “objective” to indicate hundreds of different “somethings”

On that basis a human being proves to be able

• to discover the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental representations of all these different “somethings” have in common,
• to store that “group of cognition-marks” under the name “objective” in his memory, and
• to recognise that “group of cognition-marks” from then onwards.

When he got the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental representations of all these different “somethings” have in common, in his memory, he can distinguish two different “groups of cognition-marks” in his mental representation of a particular objective:

• the “group of cognition-marks of the mental representation of that particular objective”, and
• the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental representations of all particular objectives that exist have in common.

In daily life people use the phrases

• the “objective” and
• an “objective”

but most of the people do not realise, that these phrases respectively indicate the different “groups of cognition-marks”

• the “group of cognition-marks of a mental representation of a particular objective” and
• the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental representations of all particular objectives that exist have in common.

The fact that the same word “objective” can be used to indicate two different “groups of cognition-marks” of the same mental representation of a particular objective sometimes leads to unsurmountable confusions.

To avoid of such confusions I give these different “groups of cognition -marks” different names:

• I call the “group of cognition-marks of a mental representation of a particular objective”……… “the objective”, and
• I call the “group of cognition-marks”, the respective mental representations of all particular objectives that exist have in common... “the phenomenon objective”.